Sen. Rand Paul: “Somebody needs to go to jail for this”

May 16, 2013

Writer

On radio this morning, Glenn interviewed Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) to get his perspective on the IRS and AP scandals and the ongoing investigation into the Benghazi attacks.

“It has been a fascinating, fascinating week or so to watch the goings on in Washington,” Glenn said. “We have the IRS, Benghazi, and AP scandal.”

To start, Glenn asked Sen. Paul whether or not it was possible the IRS auditing of conservative groups applying for 501(c)(4) status really could have been the work of just a few rogue employees, or if higher-ups, including President Obama, had to have been aware of what was going on.

“I think it's nearly impossible it's one or two agents because it sounds like this is from several parts of the country,” Sen. Paul responded. “But I think it's just profoundly un-American to use the power and to abuse the power of government to target people based on their political or religious beliefs, and I think the vast majority of Americans would agree with that statement.”

In a rush to feign accountability, the commissioner of the IRS was allegedly asked to resign, but, as it turns out, his tenure at the post was already set to end in June

“When you notice the game they're playing, it's the same sort of game they are doing with Benghazi. Hillary Clinton has resigned, although she never accepted culpability,” Sen. Paul explained. “Now they have with acting commissioner of the IRS who's resigning but not accepting culpability. They think they can sort of sweep it under the rug by having somebody resign who really was scheduled to leave and may or may not have had anything to do with this. I want to know who wrote the memorandum, I want to know who set the policy, and I want to know how they got this effectuated throughout the whole country. And they need to be responsible. Someone needs to go to jail for having done this.”

The leadership, or lack thereof, President Obama has shown throughout these three scandals – the IRS, Benghazi, and AP – is truly alarming. “I don't buy into the faux outrage that the president had yesterday. You know, his administration knew about this. We reported on it over a year ago,” Glenn said. “Even though I had the documentation, we were called conspiracy theorists for even bringing it up. And now he's got some faux outrage because he read about it in the newspaper. There's not a chance he read about this. If so, he's got the most incompetent administration in the history of America.”

“Well, you know, Lincoln I think put it well when he said nearly any man can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man, give him power,” Sen. Paul said. “The president of the United States has extraordinary power and with that power you want somebody who would use restraint, who would obey the rule of law. We have instance after instance where this is not the case.”

Sen. Paul likened the situation at the IRS to the ongoing Benghazi investigation, in which the only person who lost their job – Hillary Clinton – has refused to fully accept responsibility.

“I will tell you, the Benghazi story is increasingly frustrating because no one will ask why that ambassador was even there that night,” Glenn said. “And, I am sorry Senator, but it was gun running. No one will even ask, ‘Are we supplying guns, weapons, to the Syrians through Turkey?’ I mean, we’ve got a lot of evidence that is what’s happening.”

“Well, you are talking to the senator who asked Hillary Clinton that question directly,” Sen. Paul clarified. “I asked her, ‘Do you think this was about shipping guns from Libya? Was the CIA involved in transporting weapons from the CIA annex from Libya to Turkey?’”

Congress has confirmed that weapons were in fact being transported from Libya to Turkey, but Clinton continues to deny any knowledge of the situation. “Were [the guns] going with our knowledge, with our help, and did that have anything to do with the attacks in Benghazi,” Sen. Paul asked. “I asked this repeatedly, but Hillary Clinton’s response was ‘I know nothing.’ She acted as if she had never heard of the concept, but it has been reported in the media that she was the biggest advocate for arming Syrian rebels within the administration.”

Likewise, Clinton denied having any involvement in changing the talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice read on the Sunday morning talk shows in the aftermath of Benghazi, but the recent release of emails would imply otherwise. “She also said she had no knowledge of changing the talking points,” Sen. Paul said. “But the emails now show that her spokesman, Nuland, was the one intimately involved in exchanging emails that night saying we can’t talk about terrorism, there will be political ramifications.”

Sen. Paul lamented that a lack of Republican control in the Senate has made it all but impossible for him to request further hearings regarding Benghazi, but he is confident his colleagues in the House will get to the bottom of what happened that night in Benghazi and what happened in the days and weeks after.

“Without question she was involved,” he said. “And I think the whole thing about this has been her trying to escape culpability. When Ambassador Pickering did the review board, he said, well, all of these decisions happened well below the level of Hillary Clinton. My point is that's precisely her culpability because it's her job to make sure these decisions were made at her level and that security for an ambassador in a war torn country like Libya is not the place for underlings and if it took place at her underlings, if that is true, that is precisely her culpability for not making that his herself.”

In regards to the scandal involving the Department of Justice secretly subpoenaing AP reporters phone conversations, there is a fine line between protecting national security and maintaining the First Amendment’s right to freedom of the press.

“I'm troubled by the fact that if you're going to ask for records – if it's a government official who you think leaked something, I think you do everything possible to get those records and I think the level of judicial review to do it for a government official may be a little bit less,” Sen. Paul said. “But for the press, I think you should ask a judge for a warrant before you look at the press.”

“I strongly disagree with leaks,” Glenn explained. “But this administration is sending a message to whistleblowers. They have already gone up against whistleblowers more than all other presidents combined, in U.S. history, all of them. That includes FDR. This guy's had five years in office and he has gone and blown through whistleblowers more than any other president in U.S. history and all of them combined. Come on. There's a real problem. They're sending a message.”

Regardless of your position on leaks, this is an obvious abuse of power from an administration that is headed by a President who recently told graduates at Ohio State not to pay attention to anyone who says there is a possibility of tyranny in government.

There are not enough people like Sen. Paul in Washington, who are willing to put their necks out on the line for what is right. And it is up to us to provide the necessary support they need to keep fighting the good fight.

“Keep stoking the flames. We've got to keep pressure on people up here because I'm concerned. We have to survive as a country, you know, four more years of this really lack of leadership,” Sen. Paul said. “And in order to not let them run amok with the power, you know, that they have accumulated to use it against opponents, they are going to have to be held accountable. And I think this last week is the first step in trying to do that.”

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep